The defendant is the appellant in this second appeal. Both the Courts below described the suit as a suit for declaration and mandatory injunction But, on a fair reading of the plaint, it is clear that the plaintiff asked for a declaration that he is entitled to use the pathway in question for taking his cart cattle" etc., and consequently asked for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant or his men from obstructing such user by the plaintiff of the suit pathway. In effect, therefore, the suit is for a declaration of right to use the suit pathwav Learned Counsel for the appellant took me through paras. 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the plaint to show that the relief asked for by the plaintiff is one for a declaration that he is entitled to an easement or right of way within the meaning of section 15 of the Easements Act and that in substance and in effect the suit is not one for declaration of ownership of the suit property in the appellant.

The plaintiff purchased the property marked ABCDE in the sketch annexed to the plaint under Exhibit A-4 dated 23rd June, 1932. In this document an express mention is made that the plaintiff and his successors in interest are entitled to a r